power supply ON/OFF

[Dennis_Knutson]

---

@gireesh wrote:
We can avoid case structure. =,>,<, etc. whatever can use for comparing, after all output will be a boolean. This is not My question, how to connect this boolean to the setout.vi for two sup at a time on/off. From 1st sup to 2nd sup we can connect. But in reverse means if 2nd sup is at short circuit condition we have to switch OFF the 2nd sup & 1st sup at the same time. And one more thing if we use all initialisation for all sup at the begining, how to control the set volt & curr if there is one more sup of different set volt/curr.

---

You can set the order any way you want. You've decided to do everything to ps1 first. Why you can't change the order of the VIs is a mystery to me. That is trivial. You also seem to seem to be totally unaware of the functions you are using. You are calling the same function twice to turn on each supply. If you want to turn both of them off, you simply have to call that same function twice again.

[Dennis_Knutson]

Finally found all of the functions you are using. It seems you have a fatal flaw. You are trying to read voltage and current before you acually turn on the supplies.

Try something like this. It's not perfect but I think it makes a lot more sense than what you've been doing.

Oops. Change to FALSE constants in the True case because you want to turn both supplies off.

[gireesh]

Yes, I am sure. It will work. I am very happy for your interest in this and you taken this, as your problem. Special thanks for you. From my earlier thread I am thinking, you are the last word. After trying I will give a feedback.

[Dennis_Knutson]

I think I made another mistake with the indexing of the Boolean array. Double check to see which one is the foldback alarm.

[gireesh]

HELLO DENNIS

THANK YOU FOR THE IDEA .  I KNOW YOU ARE TAKEN THIS PROBLEM AS YOURS. THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN.

TRY AGAIN BUT WHATEVER I NEED, I GOT FROM YOUR MISTAKEN ANSWER. IT IS NOT MISTAKE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK SO.

I GOT HOW TO DO THIS. iI WILL TRY AND AM TRYING. I NED ACHIEVE. FROM YOR REPLY I GOT SOME IDEA. I WILL TRY TOMARROW I WILL GAVE A FEEDBACK  ABOUT THE RESULT.

THANK YOU 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND FOR ACCEPTING ANY MISTAKE. 

I DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE DRIVER THAT IS HAPPEND. i am a self studied and interested in NI.

[gireesh]

Hello dennis It is working fine. Thank you. One thing I noticed that I cannot give a loop for continuous monitoring. Oh sorry, I forgot to try the loop except case structure. The ex-or o/p we can connected to the loop stop and same o/p will go to the case structure selection. At the time of writing this, only I remembered this idea. Whatever it is working and the next part also will work. I am sure. What about you?

[Dennis_Knutson]

Sorry, I have no idea what you are asking for now.

You should have enough information by now to modify/add whatever you want.

[gireesh]

dennis

i am attaching my vi, p.ease go through this

[Dennis_Knutson]

It seems incredibly foolish to be repeatably doing all of the setup over and over again and I don't see why you are so insistent on using the exclusive or.

If you want to continuously monitor the fault condition, place just the status functions in a loop and probably in a separate loop after the initial setup and while you are doing other things. I'm assuming that the rest of your program could result in a fault condition after you have initially setup the supplies. If so, then definitely a separate monitor loop.

Also the alarm register does not have 8 elements if I remember correctly.

[smercurio_fc]

---

@Dennis Knutson wrote:

It seems incredibly foolish to be repeatably doing all of the setup over and over again and I don't see why you are so insistent on using the exclusive or.

---

I agree, and even told him that in reply #24. In one ear, out the other...